[2011] KEHC 1714 (KLR)
The court found no error in the trial magistrate's exercise of discretion in sentencing. The sentence of five years imprisonment was well within the statutory maximum of fourteen years for stock theft and was not manifestly excessive given the circumstances. The appellant's mitigation did not warrant interference...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 1714 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Isaack Wasike; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 60 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Stock Theft, Sentencing Principles, Appeal on Sentence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Isaack Wasike
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of five years imprisonment for stock theft was manifestly excessive or based on wrong principles.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found no error in the trial magistrate's exercise of discretion in sentencing. The sentence of five years imprisonment was well within the statutory maximum of fourteen years for stock theft and was not manifestly excessive given the circumstances. The appellant's mitigation did not warrant interference with the sentence, as there was no demonstration that the trial court acted on wrong principles or that the sentence was unjust. The appeal was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The sentence of five years imprisonment is upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT ELDORET
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 60 OF 2009
BETWEEN
ISAACK WASIKE.....................................................................................................APPELLANT
AND
REPUBLIC..............................................................................................................RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the decision of the Senior Resident Magistrate Hon. G. Mmasi dated 27th February, 2009
in Eldoret Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 3666 of 2008)
JUDGMENT
The appellant was charged jointly with George Luyai (1st accused in the Lower Court) and Caleb Barasa (the 2nd accused), with the offence of stealing stock contrary to section 278 of the Penal Code. The allegation was that on 7th August, 2008, at Makutano Village, Sango Sub-Location, Kongoni in Lugari District within Western Province, the appellant and the said co-accused jointly stole one cow valued at Kshs. 25,000/- the property of Aggrey Sabatia hereinafter (“the complainant”). The trio faced an alternative count of handling stolen property contrary to section 322(2) of the Penal Code, the allegation being that on the same date at the same place otherwise than in the course of stealing, the trio received or detained one cow knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property.
After pleading not guilty to the charge the trio were tried before Mmasi, a Senior Resident Magistrate. Whereas the co-accused persons were acquitted of the charge, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to serve five (5) years imprisonment on the principal count of stealing. Being aggrieved the appellant appealed to this court. There are however, no grounds of appeal in his petition of appeal.
At the hearing of the appeal the appellant represented himself as he did at the trial. He orally submitted that his appeal was against sentence only. He urged reduction of the prison sentence contending that he had now been trained and would earn a decent living if given a second chance. He reiterated that he has two children who are no under the care of his 68 year old mother.
Mr. Chirchir, the Learned Senior State Counsel appeared for the respondent state and opposed the appeal. In his view the sentence imposed upon the appellant is deserved given that the appellant sold a cow valued at Kshs. 25,000/- and sold it.
Having considered the submissions of both the appellant and counsel for the state, I take the following view of the mater. I can only interfere with the discretion of the learned trial magistrate as to the appropriateness of the sentence if it appears that the Learned trial magistrate acted on wrong principles in assessing the sentence or that she has imposed a sentence which is manifestly excessive.
The offence of stock theft carries a maximum sentence of fourteen (14) years imprisonment. The appellant was sentenced to only five (5) years, in the premises no.
There is valid ground of appeal against sentence. In the circumstances of this case the sentence of five (5) years imprisonment is not manifestly excessive. In my view the same was deserved.
In the result the appeal has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORETTHIS 4TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011
F. AZANGALALA
JUDGE
Read in the presence of :-
The Appellant and Mr. Kabaka for the State
F. AZANGALALA
JUDGE
4TH AUGUST, 2011